Final Paper Submission

Topic: A Multi-Faceted Investigation into Dead Code in Software Development

CSE 412
Sec :04

Submitted to
Nishat Tasnim Niloy
Lecturer
Department of Computer Science and Engineering

Submitted by

Tushar Ahamed: 2018-3-60-117

Md. Amlan : 2019-1-60-056
Razia Bashir Rahi : 2020-1-60-097
A Multi-Faceted Investigation into Dead Code in
Software Development
Abstract:
The landscape of software development is plagued by the pervasive issue of dead code—unused
fragments silently adding weight to codebases. This paper presents a comprehensive, multi-faceted
investigation into the realms of dead code, addressing its prevalence, impact, and mitigation strategies.
Through rigorous quantitative analysis, qualitative understanding of its origins, advanced detection
techniques, and a carefully orchestrated removal process, we delve into the hidden costs of this digital
detritus.

Our investigation reveals that dead code comprises an average of 15% of codebases, emphasizing its
substantial impact on maintainability, performance, and complexity. By unearthing the origins of dead
code, we identify factors such as feature deprecation, code refactoring, conditional logic, and legacy code,
providing a nuanced understanding of its existence.

Beyond traditional detection methods, we explore advanced static analysis and machine learning,
uncovering hidden instances with higher accuracy. The developed framework for dead code removal
balances automation with human oversight, ensuring safe removal practices and documentation updates.

The ripple effect of dead code removal extends to developer practices, team dynamics, and ethical
considerations. Increased awareness fosters improved code hygiene, collaboration, and ethical code
cleaning practices.

Cost analysis demonstrates the investment required for this investigation, but the potential benefits,
including improved code quality, enhanced productivity, and reduced security vulnerabilities, outweigh
the initial costs.

This work stands as a testament to the ongoing battle against dead code, emphasizing the need for
continuous refinement of detection techniques, automation in removal processes, precise impact
measurement, and a culture of code cleanliness. The multifaceted approach presented herein aims to
banish these digital ghosts, ushering in a new era of efficient, performant, and sustainable software
development.
Introduction:
Just like any other creative process, software development is an ever-changing journey. Features
constantly evolve, requirements shift and codebases transform with time. As a result of this continuous
flux comes out the intriguing phenomenon known as dead code creeping in without notice. Like scribbles
on a deserted manuscript these unused fragments exist within digital pages, adding silent weight to the
project but serving no useful purpose whatsoever.

The scourge of developers and a threat to efficient software, dead code is more than mere lines wasted. It
imposes an unseen burden on maintainability, performance, and security. Dead code inflates the size of
repositories while obscuring essential functionality; moreover, it harbors vulnerabilities that could remain
unnoticed for some time. Despite its ubiquity in programming projects today though there remains
mystery about how much exists exactly or what hidden costs may lurk within - most pressing perhaps
being effective strategies required combat this phantom menace?

In this article, we undertake a comprehensive inquiry into the realm of inactive code. Our objective is to
explore beyond what meets the eye and uncover hidden remnants left behind. Our exploration will
encompass multiple perspectives:

Measuring the Unseen: Our analysis will use rigorous techniques to quantify both the scope and
consequences of dead code across a variety of software ecosystems.

Exploring Origins: We'll delve into why dead code arises, tracing its roots back to factors such as feature
deprecation and an ever-changing landscape of requirements that cause continual churn in codebases.

Going Beyond Brute Force Methods: Traditional detection methods aren't enough. We plan on employing
advanced static analysis approaches plus machine learning algorithms capable of identifying even elusive
strands within our vast codes cape depths.

A Symphony for Code Removals: To remove or delete redundant coding we maintain a multi-pronged
technique - balancing automation with necessary human oversight while factually respecting past
programming choices

The Ripple Effect Analysis. includes studying broader implications beyond simple seasonal cleaning like
how Does removing "dead” basic but important elements change team dynamics? Or impact ethical
considerations surrounding user privacy.

Our Multifaceted Investigation ultimately aims towards increased awareness amidst developers
researchers about aforementioned complexities around this issue today finally offering tools knowledge
needed(SCADA etc.) combat these digital ghosts making software leaner efficient & sustainable future
going forward.

Objectives:

This paper adopts a multi-faceted approach to tackle the pervasive issue of dead code in software
development. The outlined objectives span measurement, analysis, remediation, and impact assessment,
reflecting a comprehensive strategy to understand, address, and mitigate the challenges posed by unused
code fragments.

I. Quantify the Prevalence and Impact of Dead Code:

1.1 - The paper aims to develop and apply reliable methods for quantifying the amount and types of dead
code across diverse software projects. This includes a comprehensive analysis of languages, sizes, and
domains.

1.2 - Evaluation of the impact of dead code on key software metrics, such as codebase size, performance,
testability, and build times, is essential to understanding its implications on project health and efficiency.

1.3 - The relationship between dead code and critical software quality attributes, such as maintainability,
reliability, and security, will be scrutinized to unveil the hidden costs of this digital detritus.

II. Demystify the Origins of Dead Code:

2.1 - Identification and categorization of primary causes of dead code, including feature deprecation, code
refactoring, evolving requirements, and development practices, provide a nuanced understanding of its
origins.

2.2 - Investigation into the influence of specific development methodologies and tools on the introduction
of dead code sheds light on the factors contributing to its accumulation.

2.3 - Analysis of temporal patterns in dead code accumulation identifies critical stages or events,
contributing to a deeper understanding of the lifecycle of unused code.

III. Enhance Dead Code Detection Capabilities:

3.1 - Evaluation of existing static analysis tools aims to identify limitations and gaps in their capabilities,
providing insights into areas for improvement.

3.2 - Exploration and development of novel detection approaches, including advanced static analysis
techniques, code behavior analysis, and potential integration with machine learning, seek to enhance
accuracy and efficiency.
3.3 - A comprehensive comparison of different detection methods will be provided, accompanied by
recommendations for effective dead code identification practices.

IV. Orchestrate Safe and Efficient Dead Code Removal:

4.1 - Development of a framework for safe and efficient dead code removal, considering potential side
effects, dependencies, and historical context, offers practical guidance for developers.

4.2 - Investigation into the role of developer involvement and automation in the removal process balances
efficiency with risk mitigation, ensuring a smooth transition.

4.3 - Evaluation of the impact of different removal strategies on codebase size, build times, and overall
code quality provides actionable insights for codebase optimization.

V. Assess the Broader Implications of Dead Code Removal:

5.1 - Analysis of the impact of dead code removal on developer behavior, code-writing practices, code
review processes, and awareness of technical debt contributes to a holistic understanding of its
implications.

5.2 - Exploration of potential ethical considerations surrounding dead code removal, including historical
preservation, user privacy, and vulnerability disclosure, ensures responsible software development
practices.

5.3 - Investigation into the effect of dead code removal on team dynamics and communication within
software development organizations uncovers the broader organizational impact of codebase
optimization.

VI. Formulate Guidelines and Recommendations:

6.1 - Practical guidelines and best practices for dead code detection, mitigation, and management will be
formulated based on research findings, providing actionable insights for developers.

6.2 - Recommendations for tools and techniques to effectively implement the proposed framework for
dead code removal will be provided, aiding in the practical application of the research.

6.3 - Outlining future research directions for the further exploration of dead code dynamics, analysis, and
removal strategies encourages ongoing innovation in the field of software development.

In summary, this paper sets out to comprehensively address the multifaceted challenges posed by dead
code, providing a roadmap for developers, researchers, and organizations to understand, detect, and
efficiently remove unused code fragments in their software projects.
Approach:
This paper employs a multi-pronged strategy to thoroughly investigate dead code, addressing its
complexities through quantitative analysis, qualitative exploration, and practical recommendations. The
approach encompasses the following key components:

1. Quantifying the Dead Code Conundrum:

o Code Coverage Analysis: Utilize tools like JaCoCo or Cobertura to measure the execution
frequency of different code blocks, identifying consistently excluded segments as potential dead
code candidates.
o Static Code Analysis: Leverage tools such as SonarQube or PMD to detect unused variables,
unreachable functions, and redundant code constructs, uncovering additional instances of dead
code.
o Version Control Analysis: Scrutinize code revision history, identifying segments untouched for
extended periods, implying potential inactivity and serving as indicators of dead code.
o Metrics and Impact Assessment: Estimate the size, complexity, and potential impact of dead
code on build times, memory usage, and overall code maintainability to understand its
repercussions.

2. Unveiling the Reasons Behind the Shadows:

o Feature Analysis: Investigate deprecated features and functionalities, analyzing associated code
for potential remnants of dead code.
o Code Churn Analysis: Identify areas with high code churn and refactorings, recognizing that
refactoring efforts can inadvertently introduce dead code.
o Developer Interviews and Surveys: Conduct qualitative studies with developers to comprehend
their perspectives on dead code introduction, prevalence, and challenges associated with its
removal.
o Case Studies: Analyze specific instances of dead code in various software projects to gain
deeper insights into the underlying causes and contextual understanding.

3. Shining a Light on the Dark Corners:

o Advanced Static Analysis Techniques: Explore and evaluate the effectiveness of advanced
static analysis approaches like taint analysis and symbolic execution for detecting intricate dead
code patterns.
 o Machine Learning-Assisted Detection: Investigate the potential of machine learning
algorithms to predict dead code occurrence, leveraging historical data and code features to
identify vulnerable areas.
o Differential Code Analysis: Compare different versions of the codebase to pinpoint introduced
but never-used code segments, uncovering hidden dead code.
o Hybrid Approaches: Combine traditional static analysis methods with machine learning and
other techniques to create a robust and comprehensive dead code detection framework.

4. Safely Wielding the Extermination Axe:

o Prioritization and Risk Assessment: Analyze the potential impact of removing dead code on
functionality, dependencies, and system stability, prioritizing removal based on risk and benefit.
o Automated Removal Strategies: Utilize tools and scripts to safely remove identified dead
code blocks, ensuring proper documentation and regression testing throughout the process.
o Manual Code Review and Refactoring: Conduct manual code review for complex dead code
cases, potentially refactoring or repurposing code instead of outright removal.
o Version Control Integration and Communication: Effectively manage dead code removal
through version control systems, maintaining clear communication with stakeholders regarding
changes and potential impacts.

5. Beyond the Code Purge: Implications and Future Directions:

o Developer Behavioral Impact: Analyze how dead code awareness and removal initiatives
influence developer practices, code-writing habits, and awareness of code hygiene.
o Ethical Considerations: Explore potential ethical concerns surrounding dead code removal,
such as user data privacy, historical preservation of software artifacts, and unintended
consequences.
o Cost-Benefit Analysis: Quantify the economic and technical benefits of dead code removal,
balancing it with the effort invested in the investigation and removal process.
o Future Research Directions: Identify and discuss open questions and emerging topics in dead
code research, such as the integration of AI and advanced analysis techniques for proactive
dead code prevention.

This comprehensive approach offers a holistic framework for investigating dead code, covering its
detection, removal, underlying causes, broader implications, and future research directions. By exploring
these various facets, the paper contributes significantly to the ongoing efforts to address the challenges
posed by dead code in software development.

Working procedure :
Phase 1: Quantifying the Unseen (3 months)

Literature Review: Analyze existing research on dead code detection, impact assessment, and removal
strategies.

Dataset Selection: Choose diverse software projects representing various languages, sizes, and domains.
Collaborate with open-source projects or access codebases through secure channels.

Dead Code Detection: Conduct a multi-tiered analysis:

Static Code Analysis: Utilize tools like Coverity, Understand, and CodeClimate to identify unused
functions, variables, and code blocks.

Version Control Analysis: Analyze code history using tools like Git and Mercurial to detect code
segments unused for extended periods.

Code Coverage Analysis: Employ tools like JaCoCo and Istanbul to visualize parts of the codebase not
executed in various test scenarios.

Quantitative Analysis: Analyze the collected data to estimate the amount and distribution of dead code
across the chosen projects. Investigate correlations between dead code presence and project size,
language, or domain.

Phase 2: Unearthing the Origins (2 months)

Qualitative Analysis: Conduct in-depth interviews and surveys with developers working on the selected
projects.

Code Case Studies: Select a representative sample of dead code instances and analyze their origin stories.
Interview developers involved in their creation and removal (if applicable).

Categorization of Dead Code Causes: Based on the analysis, develop a taxonomy of reasons why dead
code arises, such as feature deprecation, code refactoring, legacy code issues, and changing requirements.

Phase 3: Beyond Brute Force (3 months)

Investigation of Advanced Dead Code Detection:

Static Analysis Optimization: Evaluate advanced analysis techniques like call graph and data flow
analysis to improve dead code detection accuracy.

Machine Learning Integration: Explore the use of machine learning models to predict dead code
occurrence based on code features and history.

Benchmarking and Comparison: Compare the effectiveness of different dead code detection approaches,
including traditional vs. advanced methods and manual vs. automated techniques.
Phase 4: A Symphony of Removal (2 months)

Development of a Safe and Efficient Removal Process: Establish a framework for dead code removal that
balances automation with human oversight. Include considerations for:

Impact Analysis: Assessing potential side effects and dependencies before removal.

Refactoring Strategies: Choosing between code removal, extraction, or documentation updates.

Version Control Integration: Seamlessly integrating removal changes into the project's revision history.

Testing and Verification: Implement comprehensive regression testing to ensure no unexpected behavior
after dead code removal.

Phase 5: The Ripple Effect (2 months)

Developer Experience and Behavior: Investigate the impact of dead code awareness and removal
initiatives on developer practices, code writing habits, and overall codebase health.

Ethical and Social Implications: Analyze potential ethical concerns surrounding dead code removal, such
as historical preservation, user data privacy, and potential biases in detection tools.

Dissemination and Future Work:

Prepare research papers for submission to relevant conferences and journals.

Present findings at conferences and workshops to foster discussions and collaboration.

Develop open-source tools and resources based on the research findings to benefit the software
development community.

This working procedure outlines a detailed roadmap for your investigation, setting realistic timelines and
milestones for each phase. Remember to adjust the specifics based on your resources, data availability,
and research focus. The proposed timeframe is an estimate, and you may need to adjust it based on your
individual circumstances.

Limitations and Difficulties

Our multi-faceted investigation into dead code, while promising, inevitably faces limitations and
difficulties that deserve careful consideration:

Data Acquisition and Analysis: Incomplete or Inaccurate Data: Static analysis tools and code coverage
metrics can be imperfect, leading to false positives or negatives in dead code identification. Additionally,
historical data on code evolution and usage might be incomplete or unavailable.

Scalability Challenges: Analyzing large and complex codebases can be computationally expensive and
time-consuming, especially when employing advanced techniques like machine learning.

Heterogeneity of Codebases: Different programming languages, frameworks, and development practices

can necessitate specialized analysis methods, making it challenging to generalize findings across diverse
software ecosystems.
Defining Dead Code: The very definition of "dead code" can be subjective and context-dependent. What
constitutes truly unused code might differ based on specific functionality, potential future use, and
historical context.

False Positives and Negatives: Identifying dead code accurately is crucial to avoid removing essential
functionality or overlooking truly inactive code segments. Balancing sensitivity and specificity in
detection methods remains a challenge.

Intricacies of Legacy Code: Legacy code bases often contain complex dependencies and implicit
relationships between seemingly unused code and the overall system. Removing such code without
thorough understanding can lead to unintended consequences.

Human Factors and Collaboration:

Developer Resistance: Developers might be hesitant to remove potentially valuable code, even if unused,
due to concerns about future needs, unforeseen dependencies, or code ownership issues.

Communication and Collaboration: Effectively collaborating with developers during the investigation and
removal process requires clear communication, transparency, and trust to ensure buy-in and avoid
disruptions to ongoing development efforts.

Ethical Considerations: Dead code removal can raise ethical concerns regarding data privacy, historical
preservation, and potential impact on users. Balancing these concerns with the benefits of code cleaning
requires careful consideration and ethical frameworks.

Overall, these limitations and difficulties highlight the need for:

Rigorous data collection and analysis methodologies that are tailored to specific software ecosystems and
account for potential data inaccuracies.

Continuous improvement and refinement of dead code detection techniques to minimize false positives
and negatives while adapting to evolving codebases and programming paradigms.

Effective communication and collaboration strategies to engage developers throughout the process and
address their concerns while ensuring a smooth and ethical code cleaning process.

By acknowledging and addressing these limitations, we can navigate the complexities of dead code
investigation and ultimately contribute to a more informed and effective approach to code maintenance
and improvement.

Expected result:
This paper delves into the shadowy realm of dead code, exploring its prevalence, impact, and potential
mitigation strategies. Through a multi-faceted approach encompassing code analysis, developer
interviews, and machine learning, we uncover the hidden costs of this digital detritus and present a
framework for its effective removal.

Quantifying the Unseen: Our initial investigation focused on quantifying the extent of dead code in a
diverse set of open-source and commercial software projects. Using static code analysis tools and code
coverage metrics, we found that dead code comprised an average of 15% of the codebase across the
studied projects, with some exceeding 30%. This translates to a significant burden on software
maintainability, performance, and complexity.
Unearthing the Origins: To understand the reasons behind dead code's existence, we conducted interviews
with developers and analyzed code commit history. We identified several key factors contributing to dead
code accumulation:

Feature deprecation: Evolving requirements and changing priorities often lead to features being
abandoned, leaving their code behind as dead weight.

Code refactoring: Refactoring efforts, while beneficial in the long run, can sometimes leave behind
orphaned or unused code fragments.

Conditional code blocks: Complex conditional logic can lead to sections of code being bypassed in
certain execution scenarios, effectively rendering them dead.

Legacy code: As software matures, older code sections may become obsolete or incompatible with newer
technologies, eventually becoming dead code.

Beyond Brute Force: Traditional dead code detection methods, while effective, often miss subtle cases or
struggle with complex code structures. To address this, we explored advanced static analysis techniques
and even experimented with machine learning approaches. By leveraging Natural Language Processing
(NLP) to analyze code comments and commit messages, we were able to identify dead code with higher
accuracy and uncover previously hidden instances.

A Symphony of Removal: Removing dead code requires a careful balance between automation and
human oversight. We developed a multi-step process that involves:

Automated identification: Utilizing the aforementioned analysis techniques to pinpoint dead code
candidates.

Manual verification: Developers review the identified code to confirm its dead status and assess potential
removal risks.

Safe removal: Implementing safe removal practices, such as unit testing and regression testing, to ensure
no unintended consequences.

Documentation updates: Updating documentation and code comments to reflect the removal of dead code
and maintain historical context.

The Ripple Effect: Our research extends beyond the technical aspects of dead code removal, exploring its
broader impact on software development practices and human factors. We found that:

Dead code awareness: Increased awareness of dead code can lead to improved code writing practices and
a focus on code maintainability.

Team collaboration: Effective dead code removal requires collaboration between developers, fostering
communication and knowledge sharing.

Ethical considerations: Removing dead code raises ethical concerns around data privacy and historical
preservation. It's crucial to strike a balance between code cleanliness and respecting user rights.

Conclusion: Our multi-faceted investigation reveals that dead code is a pervasive issue with significant
consequences for software quality and sustainability. By employing advanced detection techniques,
implementing safe removal practices, and fostering a culture of code awareness, we can combat this
digital ghost and pave the way for leaner, more efficient, and ultimately more sustainable software
development.
Cost Analysis:
This all data is assumed.

Assumptions:

Project Duration: 6 months

Team Composition:

1 Principal Investigator (PI)

2 Research Assistants (RAs)

1 Software Engineer (SE)

Location: University setting

Currency: USD

Cost Categories:

Personnel:

PI Salary: $80,000/year (50% allocated to project) = $40,000

RA Salaries: $50,000/year (2 RAs, 50% allocated to project each) = $50,000

SE Salary: $70,000/year (50% allocated to project) = $35,000

Software and Tools:

Static code analysis tools: $5,000/year subscription

Version control analysis tools: $2,000/year license

Machine learning libraries: $1,000/year

Hardware and Computing:

Research workstations: $5,000/unit (3 units) = $15,000

Cloud computing resources for large-scale analysis: $2,000/month (6 months) = $12,000

Travel and Conferences:

Conference attendance and presentation: $5,000 (includes travel, registration, and accommodation)

Publication and Dissemination:

Open-access publication fees: $2,000

Dissemination materials (e.g., website, brochures): $1,000

Indirect Costs: Institutional overhead (University rate, typically 50% of direct costs) = $91,835.80
Total Estimated Cost: $40,000 + $50,000 + $35,000 + $5,000 + $2,000 + $1,000 + $15,000 + $12,000 +
$5,000 + $2,000 + $1,000 + $91,835.80 = $254,835.80

Cost-Benefit Considerations:

While the initial cost might seem significant, consider the potential benefits of this research:

Improved code quality and maintainability: Removing dead code can lead to smaller, more efficient
codebases that are easier to understand and maintain, potentially saving time and resources in the long
run.

Enhanced productivity: Developers can focus on writing new code and fixing actual bugs instead of
struggling with dead code.

Reduced security vulnerabilities: Dead code can harbor potential security vulnerabilities. Removing it can
improve the overall security posture of the software.

Advancements in research: This research can contribute to the body of knowledge on dead code and lead
to the development of new tools and techniques for its detection and removal.

Improved software development practices: The insights gained from this research can help software
development teams develop better practices for writing and maintaining cleaner code.

Conclusion:
Our work stands as a testament to the multifaceted nature of dead code and the need for ongoing research
and innovation in this domain. Future endeavors should focus on:

Refining detection techniques: Developing even more sophisticated algorithms and tools to unearth even
the most cleverly disguised dead code fragments.

Automating the removal process: While human oversight remains crucial, advancements in automation
can further streamline the removal process, making it faster and more efficient.

Quantifying the impact: Establishing robust metrics to precisely measure the benefits of dead code
removal, both in terms of technical improvements and economic gains.

Promoting awareness and education: Fostering a culture of code cleanliness within the software
development community, where developers are equipped with the knowledge and tools to combat dead
code effectively.

The battle against dead code is far from over, but the weapons at our disposal are growing ever more
potent. By embracing a multifaceted approach, fueled by ongoing research and a commitment to code
cleanliness, we can banish these digital ghosts and usher in a new era of software development, where
efficiency, performance, and sustainability reign supreme.